• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

intercooler setups

Joined
16 September 2013
Messages
210
Location
Nc
Been doing alot of reading in regards to air to air or water to air ic setups.. majority of which seems to agree that water to air benefits alot when racing/tracking because of constant air flow thru the system in which helthps cool the fluid but for daily with constant stops..street use air to air setup is just as good up too xxxhp..

Question is at what point in the nsx with a air/air setup becomes insufficient before having to switch over to water/air?.. im sure theres alot of variables but in general given that there is not alot of room in the rear without cutting up the trunk
 
It really comes down to placement and size of the IC. I had a huge air to air setup before switching to water and it was fine for street driving. On traffic sometimes things went up but the water to air has been much more efficient. I'd say if budget allow go with a water to air setup, but that's me and my opinion. A lot run fine with air to air. I also think it depends on where you live and how hot and humid it does get. If you were up north I'd be more inclined to recommend air to air but you're in NC so it's still humid there.
 
If you can get cool airflow to an air-air intercooler it's definitely the way to go.

Water-air setups have more points of failure, are more likely to heat soak, are harder to correctly design (something often overlooked no matter what type of intercooler used), are heavier, and more expensive. Water-air setups do have advantages in certain applications (shorter intake path/less pressure drop, can be put in confined spaces without airflow, can be chilled with ice for drag racing, etc), but I'm of the opinion that they should only be used if you cannot properly design an air-air setup for the given application.

The NSX is one of those cars where it could go either way and really depends on IC placement, airflow, and proper sizing.
 
Last edited:
Not too many options unless you go custom.. I was considering drilling/tap to install a bleeder but aluminum seems to be pretty thin.. welding at the moment is out of the question.. might have to look in a front mount that sits in front of the radiator.. dali seems to have one made specifically for it but based on this forum ordering from them is hit and miss .. seen a few diff setups from members here but those where yrs ago.. was hoping to see some other heat exchangers I can look at without spending a small fortune..
 
Last edited:
There's only been one member I can think of that mounted an air to air inner cooler in the front and ran the piping all the way to the back. He sold his Nsx not to long ago and it was a black one, maybe you've seen it around online.

I agree that there's more working components in a water to air setup but the heat soaking issue I'm not certain about. I've run both on my nsx and can say the water to air is more efficent. I had a huge air to air mounted underneath the car angled like a rear diffuser that measured at least 2.5 inches thick, 2 feet long and 1.5 foot wide from my memory. Actually it's probably larger than that. I could take measurements if need be. Although not as much airflow as directly in the front of the car it was enough I think underneath.

I bought the SOS air to water setup with their heat exchanger. I priced out a few options and it was easier for me to go the SOS route given their reputation, the items were on the shelf when I needed them, and I trust them. The other options are Cody and driving ambitions really for an air to water. I think DA has theirs or fabs one up by the throttle body where Cody and SOS have theirs in the drivers rear bumper area.
 
There's only been one member I can think of that mounted an air to air inner cooler in the front and ran the piping all the way to the back. He sold his Nsx not to long ago and it was a black one, maybe you've seen it around online.

I agree that there's more working components in a water to air setup but the heat soaking issue I'm not certain about. I've run both on my nsx and can say the water to air is more efficent. I had a huge air to air mounted underneath the car angled like a rear diffuser that measured at least 2.5 inches thick, 2 feet long and 1.5 foot wide from my memory. Actually it's probably larger than that. I could take measurements if need be. Although not as much airflow as directly in the front of the car it was enough I think underneath.

I bought the SOS air to water setup with their heat exchanger. I priced out a few options and it was easier for me to go the SOS route given their reputation, the items were on the shelf when I needed them, and I trust them. The other options are Cody and driving ambitions really for an air to water. I think DA has theirs or fabs one up by the throttle body where Cody and SOS have theirs in the drivers rear bumper area.

I cringed the first time I saw the NSX with the front mount build video...so unnecessary.

I think your air-air intercooler either didn't get enough air flow or it didn't get cool enough air (assuming it was sized correctly). This is definitely the problem with mid-engine turbo cars. It is much easier to implement a decently efficient air-water system on a mid-engine car than an air-air system. I just stand behind my opinion that air-air is better for street and track use if space allows and the system is designed properly.

Here is some good info on the topic from the Bell Intercoolers FAQ:

How can an air-to-air intercooler be more efficient than a water based intercooler?
There is an overwhelming quantity of ambient air available to cool an air-to-air core relative to the charge air thru the inside of the intercooler (The iced down water intercooler is the only exception to this argument.). At just 60 mph, with a 300 bhp engine at full tilt, the ambient air available to cool the intercooler is about ten times the amount of charge air needed to make the 300 hp. Whereas the water intercooler largely stores the heat in the water until off throttle allows a reverse exchange. Some heat is expelled from a front water cooler, but the temperature difference between the water and ambient air is not large enough to drive out much heat. Another way to view the situation is that ultimately the heat removed from the air charge must go into the atmosphere regardless of whether it's from an air intercooler or a water based intercooler. The problem with the water intercooler is that the heat has more barriers to cross to reach the atmosphere than the air intercooler. Like it or not, each barrier represents a resistance to the transfer of heat. The net result; more barriers, less heat transfer.

What are the relative merits of an air or water-cooled intercooler and which would suit my purposes best?
This depends on the circumstances. These circumstances are; street use, drag racing, or endurance racing (more than two minutes).

Street use: The air-to-air intercooler will prove superior in efficiency when sized properly.

Drag racing: The short spurt of power allows the iced water to cool the charge air to below ambient temperature.

Endurance racing: The air-to-air intercooler is clearly superior due to the shorter route of getting the heat out of the air charge and into the atmosphere. Endurance racing would preclude the use of ice water, thus negating the singular advantage of the water intercooler. Further, the air-to-air intercooler is (virtually, see comments below) maintenance free.
 
Last edited:
I am most certainly biased as I have have been running my own water-air intercooler setup for track use for over three years now, but packaging an Air-air intercooler in a mid-engine car is always going to be a compromise and in the NSX will be more likely to heat soak than a water-air setup with no way to control the neat soak other than adding cooling fans and air duct to try and extend your run time prior to heat soak, water-air heat soak is easier to control and designed properly will allow IATs to be controlled to ambient plus 30 degrees very easily on the track. We are talking about 20-30 min sustained high RPM boosted runs with IATs under 130*. It is not likely that any air-air will be able to replicate those cooling levels.

I have tons of dyno and track data to support my design as it may be the most efficient design and OEM looking implementation of a water-air intercooler for the NSX. This link goes over the design and testing of the unit. I spent two years designing and four years testing it in real world track environments as proof of concept. It will be available for sale very soon.
http://www.nsxprime.com/forum/showthread.php/158561-Aerochargers-TT-more-testing/page3

Dave
 
Just curious, what are the cons of positioning an air-air IC behind the engine side scoop, or under a hatch scoop ?

Using the side fender vents to try and move air is not ideal, they are not really large enough and do not actually enter into the air stream on the side of the car so not enough air will cross the core to be effective. The guys running oil coolers in the fender opening find the amount of air moving to be marginal and the Oil to Air cooler core is much smaller and much easier to plumb than an Air-Air intercooler would be, you could add some sort of scoop to the fender opening and force more air in then duct that air to a rear mounted Air-Air intercooler, but that is a lot of work in a very small space and the amount of air moved across the core would never equal what is normally found in a front mount IC.

In the engine compartment Air-Air IC's have been done, they are big and bulky, take up all the space above the intake and block rearward visibility, most require a roof or hatch scoop to supply the fresh air and they are much more likely to heat soak as the engine compartment of most mid engine cars does not vent heat very well. The NSX engine compartment is very warm with little airflow to draw heat out of the hatch area of the car. Roof mounted scoops will require a Lexan hatch and that is an expensive part that can be very delicate to keep from scratching while cleaning.

Air-Air IC's under the car have been tried, in the rear fenders behind the rear tires (like a Porsche 911 turbo), in the rear valance behind the exhaust muffler, and in the trunk with large fans to move the air. All of these designs are less than ideal packaging wise and all have their limitations as far as efficiency goes. Most are forced to be cooled from heated air passing in front of the exhaust or engine prior to reaching the core. I am not sure I understand the aversion to the water-air setup as pumps are ultra reliable nowadays, the heat exchanger placed in front of the radiator will handle the heat load with ease, the plumbing is simple with the central tunnel providing the natural path to run the lines and the water-air core is much easier to plumb and offers the shortest possible charged air path. Other than a higher cost to put it in I really do not see any other IC system as viable on the NSX. That is why I went with a water-air setup for my design.

Really for a rear or mid engine design a water-air IC is the easiest to design and package, and when compared to a air-air requiring special ducting or fans or both it is actually less complicated and just as reliable.

Dave
 
Thanks for the kind words Steve!

We did extensive testing on this subject. The key benefit to air-air intercooler's is the shear amount of constant airflow available to a core. The problem with the NSX layout is getting a large enough core and enough air volume through the core.

Liquid intercoolers offer the benefit of more efficient energy transfer between the charge air and the liquid cooling it. Our solution was to use water as the thermal transfer agent to make the packaging work. We were delighted with our design's performance. Even with repeated loading, the temperature remains constant. Although the core is rated up to 750 BHP, we have used it effectively in applications up to 900 BHP.

We offer the intercooler kits seperate from our twin turbocharger system. You can also buy the heat exchanger, water pump, reservoir separate as well:

liquid intercooler: http://scienceofspeed.com/products/...SX/ScienceofSpeed/air-liquid_intercooler_kit/
heat exchanger, water pump, reservoir, etc: http://scienceofspeed.com/products/...peed/liquid-air_intercooler_installation_kit/

intercoolerkit_800.jpg


intercoolerinstallatiokit-800.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top